Should GM Skip the Volt and Just Make More Efficient Gas Cars?
It’s glaringly clear that GM (and Ford and Chrysler) have rapidly slid into serious financial peril. Revenues have depended heavily on trucks and SUVs. The current oil price spike has fundamentally and profoundly shifted consumer behavior across the boards. People have abruptly stopped buying SUVs and trucks in favor of small fuel efficient cars (or no new car at all).
In the Wall Street Journal, Joseph White proposed three types of cars he feels the Big 3 should build to save themselves:
• A seven passenger family vehicle that gets 30 miles to the gallon on the highway.
• A midsize sedan that gets 40 miles to the gallon on the highway — and doesn’t cost much more than a Chevy Malibu, Ford Fusion or Toyota Camry.
• A pickup truck large enough to do real work and comes close to 30 miles per gallon on the highway.
He did not recommend an electric car, because:
"an electric car isn’t a mass market product for Detroit Three buyers, most of whom live in the heartland. The Detroit Three lost electric car fans a long time ago. They first need to regain relevancy with their customer base – people who like larger vehicles, who have families and who need to drive long distances."
Mr. White’s associate Keith Johnson on the WSJ blog paraphrases "Would GM… stand to gain more by forgoing moonshots on fantasy cars and focusing on just making more fuel-efficient cars that Americans want to buy?"
Source (Wall Street Journal )
Popularity: 6%
(6 votes, average: 3.67 out of 5) 
Loading ...
June 30th, 2008 at 11:32 am
No.
Do both.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:35 am
GM will make those cars anyway. What’s stopping them from making the Volt AND making more fuel efficient gas cars? I think there is an assumption in this statement that the Volt program takes away from developing better gas engines. I don’t think it takes away, GM is a huge company. They’ll do both. Just like all the other companies that are developing electric right now.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Side note: that’s a late 80s early 90s dodge caravan isn’t it? My friend used to drive one of those. Are they fuel efficient? Why is it pictured on this thread?
June 30th, 2008 at 11:47 am
White is both right….and all wrong.
Of course, for the short term, the types of cars he recommends would help the Big Three.
But to ignore the move to electric cars entirely? Jeez! Imaging the editorials that would be written, slamming GM for again dropping the ball, for being short-sighted when ANYONE could see that the days of gas-only cars were numbered.
No Mr. White. GM is doing exactly what it should. (And by the way, has he forgotten about the high MPG Cobalt they’re rolling out?)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:49 am
In my opinion, the Wall Street Journal usually gets things like this wrong. Their process is to apply old market models to completely new types of products, and so they completely miss new markets.
The Volt is a new market model. Most miles are driven on electricity at less than $1/gallon equivalent. Plugging in at night is more convenient than going to the gas station. The gas engine is always there for longer trips, or if you forget to plug in now and then (I know I will). What’s not to like? Eventually, everyone will want one of these.
With ever increasing global demand for oil, gas prices will remain high or continue to increase. With electricity at $1/gallon equivalent, plug-in hybrids are a no-brainier.
The only issue will be the purchase price of the vehicle. There is nothing about batteries that makes them inherantly expensive, so as volume ramps up, costs will come down.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Apparently Mr. White thinks GM just needs to wave their magic wand to produce these vehicles. What a simpleton. How far can we really squeeze the turnip on these ICE’s. We are maxing out efficiency with cost/benefit. Anything else that is done will cost al lot of money to produce and will only gain 3-6MPG.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Engine makers are now approaching the limit on ICE efficiency with gasoline. Forced induction and direct-injection may become more of a mainstay to achieve better MPG while not sacrificing power, but it increases cost and complexity of the system…
June 30th, 2008 at 11:51 am
“more efficient” gas cars really is only used to mean “smaller, cheaper” cars, which none of the U.S. automakers can make
competitively - too large apercentage of their cost is in labor, unionized labor (at Chrysler rates of $135 PER HOUR) . End of discussion.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
The Pontiac Vibe is a crossover SUV that gets good gas mileage. But Toyota makes the engine. The Chevy Aveo gets great mileage, but that’s made by the Koreans. Basically, most efficient GM vehicles are not actually GM engineered. That has to change.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:54 am
GM needs to focus on the big picture their going to be bankrupt in two years if they don’t start selling high fuel efficient vehicles..Yes the volt is wonderful, but if that’s all your hoping on saving you then game over. They priced it right out of the mainstream america and shot straight for the people making 75000-100000 a year..hello what about the 50000 or less..if they would do a new cobalt that got 50 miles highway and 40 miles city for under 25000 then game on make revenue to fund projects like volt. If you only sell 50,000 volts a year your not going to be around for long. Watch for honda and toyota in the next few years a honda fit hybrid 55 miles highway and 68 miles city..under 25,000 yep the volt will do great..
June 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
The real problem that needs to be addressed is how America can switch to ethanol faster. GM is doing its part with Flex-fuel. Were is national(Federal) leadership in the transition to ethanol??? This is America’s #1 priority, IMO. Its the fuel not the fuel effiency,
June 30th, 2008 at 11:56 am
They need to do both. GM should be working on putting more fuel efficient cars and trucks on the market with their two-mode hybrid. If not that, they could use someone else’s hybrid technology to jump start them. They need these cars and trucks now, but even so, it will be several years before they can be done. Even after the Volt is out, their is going to be a need for small efficient cars that do not have the Volt technology. This is not going to be a situation where once the Volt is out, all gasoline cars and trucks will be history. This is a game changer that will occur over a period of 10 to 20 years. It will not happen like turning off one type of vehicle and turning on another.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Produce the Volt and increase efficiency in the other models!
Unfortunately, GM’s priorities still appear to be screwed-up. Efficiency and styling are MUCH MORE important than power. We demand MORE efficiency even if the price is less power!
Regarding styling: No eggs, no boxes, no airplanes and no fish.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Joseph White? Where do these morons come from and how do they obtain gainful employment by writing?
The masses have NEVER had a viable electric vehicle choice, so how could they have lost their fans? Fans of what?
Everyone on this board understands the real problems:
1. cheap gas in the past
2. unnecessarily large vehicles
3. unnecessarily massive engines with ludicrous HP.
4. marketing efforts to ram rod this “American dream” down our throats.
It the major auto makers cannot deliver a good PHEV in the next two years, I will buy a Honda Civic CNG and only have to pay 25K…..
June 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Lyle, I sure wish you could have used a better example of a fuel efficient vehicle in the post’s picture.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
In the near term, GM, Ford, & Chrysler must focus on producing more of the fuel efficient cars they already make (i.e. convert SUV assembly lines to smaller car assembly lines).
In the medium term, car manufacturers are going to have to embrace plug-ins.
In the long term, car makers must figure out how to make carbon fiber cheap for the masses.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Ethanol isn’t the best environmentally, at least the corn-made version, and gets worse MPG. Currently, it’s about on par with gas prices though, when factoring in the lower price per gallon.
What GM needs to do is a three-pronged approach. Make all new products flex-fuel capable, make more efficient vehicles, and make technological breakthroughs with electric cars and E-REVs.
By now they should know that it makes sense to have a well-diversified portfolio, instead of putting all their eggs in one SUV basket.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
What Mr White seemed to be saying is for the Big Three to leave electric cars to the “other” manufacturers like Telsa and the Japanese and the Europeans. I did not read the article, yet. But I will.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
everyday the reality of the “VOLT” gets dimmer
June 30th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
30 MPG highway rating really means maybe 27 on the highway and probably 20 city. this is an absolutely PATHETIC goal.
i agree with #1 Mike756 — do both. Build electric cars, and also build more efficient gas cars. But forget this 30MPG highway crap, we need to aim much higher than that to make a difference.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
“an electric car isn’t a mass market product for Detroit Three buyers, most of whom live in the heartland….(people) who have families and who need to drive long distances.”
What is this guy talking about? Has he ever SEEN the heartland? Where do you think all of the Honda Civics and Accords are sold? Large cars are NOT all that relevant to Americans, capable cars are! The Chevy Volt is EXACTLY the kind of car that the American heartland is looking for. Heck, it’s the car that ALL of America is looking for. The capability to achieve massive reductions in our dependency upon foreign oil is ENTIRELY relevant to the American car buyer.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
I think if you have $1.40/gal ethanol all problems go away, and everybody says that is do-able. Just a matter of political will.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
I will not buy a gasser from anyone. My next car will be fully electric. Period.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Mike 756 said it all at #1. I think that I and others have been saying just that here for months.
#4 FME 111:
Where is the “high MPG Cobalt they’re rolling out”? I have been hearing about it for weeks. If it isn’t going to show up until 2010, the game may be over.
Saturday I suggested to Lyle that it would be an appropriate issue for GM-Volt.com, because such cars in the short run are the only thing which will allow GM survivability to get to the Volt in the longer run.
I’m here with the cash in my hand if it will get the same mileage as a Yaris or a Fit. Do it!
I used to suggest on Fastlane that GM had enough stuff in the parts bins to do this sooner rather than later. Why does the Aveo get essentially the same mediocre mileage as the Cobalt? If GM has gas engines and drivelines in Europe that get 40+ MPG, why couldn’t they plug them into the Aveo, which at least has the advantage of being light? If Jon Moss could make the Impala SS out of the Caprice Classic in just a few months, all this kind of stuff is possible. Where is Jon Moss, now that we need him?
At risk of repeating myself, if GM can win its class at Le Mans (well 2nd this year) and the 24 Hours of Daytona, it can do anything. If Bob Lutz put the Corvette race team - in house engineers, Katech, Pratt & Miller, et al, on a crash program to make a super mileage Aveo or Cobalt, on the basis that it was an existential challenge for the Corporation, which it most assuredly is, they would get it done in damn short order. The same dedication and drive which wins Le Mans can product world beating road cars. Never doubt it.
1.4 Ecotec, 6 speed manual Aveo, with as much weight as possible removed and the best possible aero tricks. 40 mpg highway, 33 city. Do it!
June 30th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
They will have to build vehicles that get 35mpg by 2020 anyways, so of course GM is engineering more efficient vehicles now…
June 30th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Do both. American car makers have done a great job of turning off
American car buyers. Now they need to please everyone, which is impossible. So they need to please the most.
EREV is the future.
GM doesn’t have to worry about CAFE by 2020 if their entire line is EREV.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
As many of you already said, I agree that GM should do both. However, I don’t think anyone else has yet mentioned on this thread….I really want a Volt so I can stop being so dependent on foreign oil. Isn’t anyone else tired of sending your money to the middle east, where everyone wants to destroy the U.S.?
I already ride a motorcycle everyday, which gets 45 MPGs. I really don’t care if GM builds a car that can get 50 MPGs. For me to make a paradigm shift, I want something that uses zero gasoline/oil.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
To get high gasoline mileage we may have to accept cars and trucks that are designed quite differently from those of today. You either must find a radically different gasoline or diesel engine design or change the shape and weight of the vehicle. There isn’t much more mileage they can squeeze out of today’s car design.
I, for one, would gladly accept a “egg” shaped car (or what ever reasonable design) that would allow me to achieve over 50 miles per gallon on the highway. All I want is an easy entry and exit roomy car that is stylish in the inside while being efficient outside. I view the interior of the car as being more important to me than the outside appearance. While driving, I am on the inside looking out.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
#10 Jason D & #12 N Riley:
Right!
June 30th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
“an electric car isn’t a mass market product for Detroit Three buyers, most of whom live in the heartland. The Detroit Three lost electric car fans a long time ago. They first need to regain relevancy with their customer base – people who like larger vehicles, who have families and who need to drive long distances.”
I suppose Mr. White does not believe CALIFORNIA to be a big enough market for the Detroit Three?
June 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
GM’s (2001) 80+ MPG GM Precept (with Japanese components).
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1266481.html?page=1
June 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Who is this guy? let us all go throw eggs at him.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
#24 Noel Park
I agree.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
29 comments in 43 minutes? It that a new record? You have touched a few nerves here Lyle. This is a bottom line survival issue, as if we didn’t all know that already.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
GM already makes fuel efficient cars. They just don’t sell them in America. They have to do the Volt anyway because, a) they’re already committed to it and b) practically every other car manufacturer is making electric cars. Mercedes, for example..
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/06/30/a-class-mercedes-goodbye-fuel-cell-hello-tesla-battery/
So, its do it now or kiss market share goodbye.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
The Wall Street Journal is dead wrong! They are stuck in the old mind frame of “stick with what has been selling.” However, what has been selling isn’t now and that market is not likely to come back. Gas prices make big gars un affordable and that is not going to change.
It seems to me that GM took a big leap of faith and happened to be right. From the information we get, they are on target on all of their benchmarks and I believe there is a huge market waiting for them. We’ve got over 30,000 people who have indicated that they want to buy the Volt and it hasn’t even been officially unveiled yet. As soon as it is, that number will really take off because the Volt meets the needs of most drivers, doesn’t use gas, needs very little maintenance and is extremely quiet. Stay with it GM, you’ve got a lot of people rooting for you.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Too bad the cost of diesel is so high because of the refinery bottlenecks. Small, efficient diesel engines are a better option for fuel efficiency than gasoline. Hell, you can drive to work after you make some french fries!
Regardless, I want my next car to be a Volt mainly to reduce our dependence on oil. I hate the idea that the price of my fuel can change drastically in less than a day because some idiot makes some comment about the oil supply or someone shoots a pipeline!
June 30th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
#31 srschrier:
It’s enough to make one weep, isn’t it?
June 30th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Could you imagine the ribbing that GM would get from the New York Times if it weren’t developing an EV? This is an exaple of a paper’s pathetic attempt to try and make news rather than report news.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
I don’t know about skipping the Volt, but they HAVE to build these high effiiciency cars, that is the market now.
Amercians have long had trouble with highly ‘efficient’ cars, because the maximization of efficiency always means one other thing– being ‘underpowered,’ so quite simply they have not been built.
Those days are over for most Americans, and they aren’t ever coming back. ‘John and Jane America’, living in suburbia are feeling the pain now, they just want a car that doesn’t cost them $70 bucks to fill that only gets 300 miles. They want it to go back to the old days, when 300 miles costs $30.00.
What is the best selling car of the next decade? I don’t know the brand or the model name, but I wager it has 4 doors, a 4 cyclinder engine (rated around 135HP) and gets 40MPG.
In the new world 8 cyclinders = “luxury sport”.
If any automaker doesn’t take the “red pen” to just about all it’s engines, that automaker will cease to exist.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
#32 Ash
>>Who is this guy? let us all go throw eggs at him.
Hah! For some reason that reminds me of an old Simpsons’ episode…
Moe: They’re headed for the old mill!
Homer: No we’re not!
Moe: Well… then, let’s go to the old mill anyways, get some cider!
Shoot, I’m so far off topic maybe I deserve an egging.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
ABSOLUTELY NOT!
GM CANNOT COMPETE WITH HONDA ON CHEAP, FUEL SIPPING VEHICLES.
The American automakers can only innovate to a better market position against low cost manufacturers, and this energy crisis is the opportunity to do this.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Not all Americans are ready for the change. But, pocket book economics will soon convert them. We are so used to our big cars and big trucks that some of us find it very difficult to move towards an economical vehicle. Not me. I would rather save money and resources and still get where I want to go without worrying about how much it is going to cost to make the trip.
Get started GM. Give us more economical cars and trucks. The Volt will be here someday and it will still take 10 to 20 years for it and its siblings to take over the market. Plenty of time to make money on smaller more efficient cars and trucks.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
They will drop the fuel cell before they drop the Volt.
If they drop the Volt they might as well give up. Maybe they could be bought out by Tesla.
They problem that car makers created was not having the cars available when we want them. The Volt was wanted yesterday but we have to wait forever for it.
What I don’t understand is that if the batteries are not the problem why don’t we have a 40 miles EV only available now. The drivetrain has been proven in all concept fuel cells as well as the EV1.
Go GM! Go Volt! We Need it NOW!!!!!!!!!
June 30th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
#40 Statik:
Exactly right.
#41 Mike-O-Matic:
Well this whole soap opera remind me of a Simpsons’ episode, or maybe a whole season. So who could blame you? You do deserve it.
Maybe we could have some fun figuring out which of the players matches up with which Simpsons’ character. Mr. Burns is a natural, but I already took him for Dick Cheney, so he’s off the board.
June 30th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
#42 Jason M Hendler
“GM CANNOT COMPETE WITH HONDA ON CHEAP, FUEL SIPPING VEHICLES.”
Give me a break, Jason. You can’t actually believe that, do you? Being able to produce a gas sipping auto only takes engineering and the desire to do it if the market demands it. GM has the engineering. The market is demanding it. So, the only question is does GM desire to do it? Theres a lot of gold in them there little cars. My slang is not quite correct, but you understand what I mean. If GM wants to do it, the demand is there to buy everyone they can build. So, get started GM……
June 30th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
As long as there are teenagers and men that feel the need to compensate, there will be a market for big engine cars. Someone will always want a mustang, or corvette, or a viper. But like others have said here, that will become a side market to the main consumer in the US. The base will want the high MPG’s to get their kids to school or run to the grocery store. The other, smaller, group will always be willing to pay more for their gas so they can squeal their tires a little louder at the next green light.
The first company to produce an electric plug in that gets 40, 50, or a 100 miles per charge will win. I really think that in the future, people will end up owning two cars - one an electric commuter car, and the other the workhorse, gasonline or other, to haul the stuff from Home Depot and take the kids across the country on vacation
June 30th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Ohmexcited,
I couldn’t agree more that such “joint ventures” with the Japanese need to end. Unfortunately, it is currently a Japanese requirement as explained in this (very enlightening, IMHO) article:
http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html
In a nutshell … competition from foreign products is pretty much prevented in Japan. The rare exceptions are products (like the ones you mentioned) that result from joint ventures. In these cases, Japan wins on the exchange, since they usually get free intellectual property or they get to make other countries and businesses dependent on them. It’s a subtle, brilliant, ruthless strategy.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
GM should build whatever keeps them in business. They certainly won’t be able to live on profits from Volts and hybrids in the near term. What they build in the short term can only be judged by GM. However, the longer term needs to be considered with great care. GM and the other American car makers can’t afford to be in a similar situation when they rise from this current low in the future.
Also, I think a full electric vehicle is a great idea. Hybrids and Volt essentially carry 2 powertrains which isn’t the most efficient way to propel vehicles. Hybrids are great transition technology, but I think battery technology has progressed to start developing full EV’s in small volumes. This probably isn’t possible in the short term for any American maker, but it should be considered for the future. I certainly like the idea of getting off gasoline as soon as possible. I wonder what a purpose built EV would get in terms of range give today’s LiIon technology and advanced vehicle materials.
I could see owning an EV for daily commutes to work and an SUV or truck for playing and hauling stuff on the weekend.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Nope. Making ‘more efficient gas cars’ does NOT solve the problem. It still keeps us on oil. We want OFF of oil.
I for one am NOT going to buy another vehicle that uses gas. It either plugs in, or no deal. PERIOD.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Be careful Kent (#28), there were two motorcycle accidents in Atlanta, just this morning. A co-worker of mine was almost killed saving a nickel on a bike, a couple of weeks ago. The future without Volt (or other EREVs) is going to be very expensive, from a purely human standpoint.
If “Middle America” doesn’t want the Volt, send them all down SOUTH!!!
I think GM should spread Flex-Fuel more widely (even though I am skeptical that Ethanol will ever amount to much more than a side-show), because:
1) It doesn’t cost GM that much to add to a car,
2) Buyers will see it as increasing future fuel options, even if it never does (and hey, I could be wrong).
Ethanol probably is something we need to do now; however, I think it will lose out, long term:
1) The total, biological output potential of US agriculture will never have the potential to replace as much oil as auto electrification will (and we still have to eat).
2) The current reality is Ethanol from Corn. If this does not present a direct conflict with food availability, consider all the farmers looking for a corn-to-Ethanol-for-cash bonanza who could be growing something else. It should be curtailed as soon as “Cellulosic Ethanol” goes on-line.
3) Cellulosic Ethanol, when it does emerge as significant, still has long-term ramifications I’ve heard no one address: what happens to our arable land when corn stalks and other farm ‘waste’ stops being plowed under to improve the soil? Probably nothing for a decade or so, but then it will become all too apparent in dropping agricultural yields, almost too late to remedy.
The best biofuel idea I’ve heard yet is algae-to-biodiesel (who cares about other uses for pond scum?). But even this requires large amounts of scarce fresh water, and lots of research yet to do before it gets off the ground.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
To those advocating diesel,
Although diesel engines offer some advantages, making them run clean enough to meet USA emissions requirements is tough, and that is about to get much harder. IMHO, that is the main reason Caterpillar is completely exiting the on-highway diesel engine business.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
The WSJ is looking at the financial health of GM and not at the religious discussion about the Volt. What the WSJ understands, correctly, is that whether the Volt succeeds in 2012 or not, the vast majority of the NA auto market will be for conventional vehicles. This situation will last for some time.
Should GM take steps, now, to ensure that the majority of their production has class-leading fuel economy in 2012, so that they can compete effectively in the majority of the market?
Can GM take steps, now, to help get class-leading fuel economy in 2011? 2010? 2009?
The recent release of the Cobalt XFE, inadequate though it is, was a step in the right direction. Problems aplenty remain.
The Vue is 500lbs heavier than the competition and the Cobalt is a few hundred pounds over class nor, too, and offers no corresponsing technical advantage (towing, capacity, etc). Heavier cars get worse fuel economy. Period. Especially in town.
The upcoming Vue hybrid will be powered by a V6. WTF? People don’t buy hybrids for performance (read the Accord hybrid’s obituary).
GM is losing money TODAY. What should they be doing for the near-term to return to financial health? Banking on the 60K-in-2012 Volt will not save GM. Period.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
I read the article, and I just think White is dead wrong. First, the Big 3 can’t just focus on their supposed current customer base. Looking backwards, over the long-term, Detriot’s Big 3 shrunk precisely because their customer base shrunk. They left the small car segment to the competition, and the competition took that, and then built on their succes to eat away at the rest of the auto market. Financial problems ensued. The Big 3 can’t reverse that long-term trend by simply catering to their existing customer base. They have to expand their customer base.
And they can. There are tons of people who post here who drive Toyotas and Hondas, but have said that they will buy a Volt.
Second, looking ahead, with gas at $140 a barrel and rising, the Big 3’s supposed base is shrinking, and will continue to shrink. In fact, we had a syndicated article in our newspaper last week about mini-van sales being down by 20% nationally. Making a 30 mpg v. 20 mpg will not alter the fundamental (and presumably permanent) shift in oil price levels. GM must build the Volt now. Build more efficient large stuff now, sure they should. But building the Volt now will give GM an edge in building mid-size SUV and mini-van plug-ins soon. Otherwise, GM’s “base” of large cars, mini-vans, and SUVs may very well disappear forever.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Phbbt. GM didn’t just fall off the turnip truck. Don’t you think that if they knew any conceivable way to put out a high mileage big SUV at a reasonable cost, they would do so? Their 2 mode hybrid was as good as they could come up with using conventional means. And as nice as it is, it’s still not a very compelling price/mpg point.
They ONLY way they’re going to get to the kind of price/mpg points they want to get to is through electirc drivetrains. GM must now be starting to realize this as well since they learned from their \Volt engineers that the weight of the vehicle was not as big a factor in the MPG as the aero. The chieftians at GM must have started thinking EREVSUV right at that moment! I just wonder why they haven’t started a program for it, yet. Maybe they have. Or maybe they will just start cramming once the \Volt gets a little farther along.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Nice post Jackson #51…
I didnt even hear about the algae alternative until earlier this year….it certainly sounds great….plus it seems to be closer to reality or err..viability…. than say oh…..EEStor ?? or Fuel Cells ??
I never thought about the ’soil replenishment’ angle on cellulose. Interesting piont.
Good stuff today……
June 30th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Electrics aren’t ready yet. We are in an energy storage crisis. No known material can store enough electrical energy at a low weight and low cost to suit the wants (not requirements, but wants) of most Americans.
Most Americans only drive about 40-miles per day. But most Americans want a car that can get them 400-miles per day and doesn’t cost them a fortune. Serial hybrids are a step in the right direction. But we are really relying on the assumption that better battery technology is just a few years away. That’s what GM thought during the late 90s.
I think until our energy storage crisis is solved, we must be primarily focused on producing the most fuel efficient vehicles possible. Meanwhile, the auto industry could divert some funding into advanced technologies (like serial hybrids) so that when the technology does become viable, they are ready to quickly act with a platform that works.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
This is the second time today I have seen the trem “moon shot” applied to the Volt. How is this a moon shot? If we are to believe GM, they already have a battery at or near their design specs, the rest is just integration. Software could be tricky, but certainly doable. So how can anyone compare this to a moon shot?
Pundits….
June 30th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
I wouldn’t go so far as to say that American automakers can’t make a fuel-efficient small car, but if they drop the Volt to make them, I think they are doomed. Yes, they can make such cars; but they’ll be in competition with every Asian company out there: with less direct (or current) experience, direct tooling, and every other thing that gives Toyota & co. an advantage. It costs money to do this, too.
By bringing out the Volt, they would leapfrog all these competing companies, at least for a time.
The question becomes:
1. Does GM kill the Volt and die trying to match Japan at it’s own game, or
2. Does GM fail to make competitive cars long enough to bring out the Volt, and die?
An attainable, positive reality lurks (if it exists at all), somewhere in between.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
#58, Marcus - Exactly, it’s a done deal, it just ain’t done yet :-))
Mr. Lutz knows that the battery is a done deal, that’s why he’s so giddy lately.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
#17 Eric C. says: “Ethanol isn’t the best environmentally, at least the corn-made version, and gets worse MPG.”
Yes, corn made ethanol is a joke, but cellulosic ethanol will be the real deal. E-REV type vehicles can eliminate 75% of our gasoline use. Cellulosic ethanol could then take care of the remaining 25%.
Also note that engines which are specifically made to run on ethanol get better MPG than gas engines. It’s only when you add ethanol capability to a gas engine as an afterthought that MPG becomes worse.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
I think EVs and EREVs are the future of the automotive “industry”. Sure GM needs to have more efficient cars and trucks to sell now and before EVs and EREVs become the norm. But to say they should ignore working on EVs and EREVs now to concentrate on ICE efficiency is short sighted.
They way I see it if your an automotive manufacturer and you don’t have plans for EVs or EREVs you are going to go bankrupt eventually. If gas prices continue to increase at the rate they have all car companies (Euro and Asian brands included) are going to be near bankruptcy because there products will just be too expensive for the majority to operate.
Now is it possible that the VOLT won’t save GM, certainly. But I equally believe that if they don’t have something like the VOLT they will fail.
GM is in a do or die position, an even if they do they could still die.
The good news is there are many MPG saving tech that GM and all other big auto makers have developed over the years that they can put into play. The only problem is that each of these measures taken to improve MPG increases costs as well (which is why they hadn’t been implemented up to this point).
GM already makes some very nice efficient small cars, they are just sold in Europe. I have a feeling like Ford has done we may see Euro models coming to the US to fill the gaps in the current lineups.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Live webcast, right now, of Governor Schwarzenegger at Tesla HQ, on clean-air tech and the announcement on Tesla’s Whitestar.
http://gov.ca.gov/
June 30th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
The WSJ article suggests that GM, to save its business, forsake electric cars in favor of producing today’s cars, but with better mileage. Many of today’s hybrids attempt to be today’s cars, but with better mileage. Hybrids are partially electrified. Should automakers forsake hybrids? E-Flex is the next generation in the hybrid evolution towards BEVs.
I’m sure GM is aware of their business situation. GM already considered its finances and made decisions to pursue the Volt. There will be a lot of second-guessers, like Joseph White. Is the WSJ so conservative that they are risk averse? There is also a risk to maintaining status quo.
GM does not need to cater to outdated concepts of customer needs. People who have (4-person)families and who need to drive long distances can be served by the Volt.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 78% of ALL round trips and 92% of all one way trips are less than 40 miles. The Volt is relevant to that use pattern. GM seems wise in its attempt to capitalize on that statistic.
People who like larger vehicles will have to pay for that “want.”
June 30th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Tesla stated a pure EV, under 30K would be out from them no later than 4 years from now. Whitestar at 60K before rebates.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Could they build something like the md-80’s Pontiac Fiero? I had an early one (before they upped the engine size) and it got 40mpg (mostly highway driving). If not for the 80’s era fit and finish it would have been perfect. It had an all plastic body with color all the way through so scratches were easy to repair. I assume it would need impact improvements….would those add so much weight as to kill it?
It was only a 2-seater but a fun commuter….and it was cheap.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
If GM doesn’t make better cars for people who want small cars, starting today, they will not survive long enough to birth the Volt. Sorry to burst the bubble, but that’s where they are.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
#28 N Riley says: “To get high gasoline mileage we may have to accept cars and trucks that are designed quite differently from those of today. You either must find a radically different gasoline or diesel engine design or change the shape and weight of the vehicle…”
There isn’t a whole lot more we can do to improve piston engine efficiency. The fundamental problem is that these engines work against themselves. The compression stroke of one cylinder steals from the power stroke of other cylinders.
But we can do a whole lot more with aerodynamics and weight. Here’s an SUV that gets 100 MPG:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/24/interview-with-michael-brylawski-of-rmi-part-one-history-of-t/
The secret is carbon fiber.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
GM should continue making the Volt and the sooner they get it out, the better. Toyota would love for GM to drop the Volt because they are deathly afraid of the Volt. GM should continue doing what they are doing. Let GM decide what is best for them. After sleeping for 30 years the are now fully awake. WSJ is not one that knows anything about the auto business or any other business for that matter.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
My two cents:
It takes a few years to bring a product to market. It takes one day to eliminate a product from the market. So far GM has closed plants in response to the lagging sales of its money making products.
One of the reasons listed as opposition to some of the PROPOSED higher CAFE standards in the past was that it would take money to improve the efficiency of an ICE engine and each new improvement takes cost more and more dollars. Supposedly the automakers would have less to invest in long term goals. Goals like the E-Flex drive train.
It appears that GM is foregoing all the short term improvements in ICE fuel efficiency to plow ahead with the E-Flex drive train. Companies that delay developing competitive technology to answer the E-Flex will be in a very tight spot 7 years from now.
Other car companies are concentrating on bringing there autos up to the pathetic 30-40 mpg range. Although this may sound good to some now. These mpg figures will still leave a huge hole in the economy. To offset the average USA citizen having to spend 20% of their income on energy the gas milage of cars will have to be greatly improved. 37mpg helps ease the pain but won’t bring the % of peoples income spent of energy back down enough to have it back to a % that is inline with what it was a year or two ago.
For that we need 80 mpg or better. The company that can put out a reasonably price car that gets 150mpg will be in the driver seat. Most of the automakers don’t appear to be striving for that.
GM is striving for that with the Volt but it is yet to be seen if they can do it at a price that will make it affordable to the masses.
Will Toyota or Mitsubishi step up and deliver this car? If they do it will not be sooner that 2012 apparently. Will GM? If so it will not be before 2012 either. So the race is still wide open despite GM being the only one with the game changer in the works set to go into decent numbered production. But the price is currenly a little to high to qualify.
Question is can GM get the price down another 12K before Toyota or Honda can introduce their “game changer”. Unfortunately for us the wait is going to be a long one.
When the volt was first introduced
June 30th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Hey Statik #63….
I’m imagining the Governator at his press conference saying things like…
“Come with me if you want to live”
“Take my HAND!”
“Do it, do it now!”
June 30th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Thank you for those kind words, Murray.
I wonder if any other Ethanol-observers out there can address this not-plowing-stuff-under issue with Cellulosic Ethanol? It would be one thing if there were any discussion at all about it, but I haven’t heard anything.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I’d love to see an all carbon-fiber car body. I think carbon-fiber is a no-brainer … when the time is right. There’s been a lot of discussion here about the timliness of the EFLEX and earlier electric drive-train technologies, and I think we all agree that the time for them is finally ripe.
Unfortunately, carbon fiber is very expensive and labor-intensive to work with at this time, and I doubt very much that it will have much, if anything to contribute to the current crisis.
GM hasn’t been sitting still on internal combustion engines, and I think a big surprise may be in the offing for those saying that ICE can’t be substantially improved. Stay tuned …
June 30th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
#71 Murray
“Hey Statik#63…I’m imagining the Governator at his press conference saying things like…“Come with me if you want to live…”
That did have a few light hearted moments,lol.
Other random bits of interest:
California built Whitestar is officially called the “Model S,” $60,000 before rebates, minimum range 225 miles.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
It was orignally going to be made in New Mexico, not now.
The CAEATFA program that was approved last Wednesday in California, exempts automakers from paying sales and use tax when they purchase manufacturing equipment to build electric vehicles in the state.
Will save Tesla…and any other auto manufacturer alot of coin if they are building a ZEV-EV.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
I really should be working but since you brought up the stuff about Tesla, I got the obesssion bug again…..after some very light browsing around I found this interesting interview w/ Elon Musk.
I found the ‘Production and sales strategy’ section quite interesting…. regarding the Tesla drivetrain and it remaining proprietary….
Elon Musk: “…So we’re not trying to keep the power train to ourselves, we’re happy to sell that to other companies.”
Interviewer aks who??
Elon Musk: “…It’s still confidential, but we think we’ll be able to announce a deal with a major car company maybe later this year.”
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/jan-june08/musk_06-25.html
June 30th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Both should be built. The Volt would be the halo car to aspire to (sort of like the Corvette was the halo car when gas was cheap) and get people into the showroom to buy a “traditional” high mileage car. A new high mileage Cobalt is supposed to be introduced around 2010, so the timing should work.
Same with Prius. It’s Toyota’s halo car now which gets people thinking about all Toyotas as being fuel-efficient cars, get them to the showroom, and sell a “traditional” high mileage car. The hybrid hype must be working for Toyota, since I’ve overheard conversations by people I know who should supposedly know their cars… and mistaken the Yaris as a hybrid!?!
I’ve even heard people think that the Honda Element is a hybrid as well, probably partially because it’s Japanese and looks weird. It’s amazing how a little ignorance can go a long way to help the reputation of some companies, and unfairly hurt others. So I’d guess that it’s GM’s strategy to make people believe that all its vehicles are electric-powered because of all the Volt hype they’re going to hear.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
#68 Dave G
The Hyper Car concept utilizes a hydrogen engine for propulsion. I still believe hydrogen is too far in the future to to be of any practical use today. Plus, it ties us to the same fuel structure we have today with service stations on every corner and more serve work required at the dealers. Hydrogen is a good thing for the “energy” companies (big oil) and their service station network and for the automotive service centers. It is no different than being locked into gasoline, just different suppliers.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
ALSO: In that interview with Elon Musk I posted in #76….
Elon bashes the whole hydrogen myth and the use of fuel cells being powered by hydrogen. He breaks it down in plain words too, heck even I understood it!
Sorry, I’ll stop pushing that interview now….I thought it was good though.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
#51 Jackson:
With regard to bio-fuels:
1) Yes, it is unrealistic to expect 100% of our gasoline to convert to ethanol, but that’s not the goal. If E-REV type vehicles can convert perhaps 75% of our gasoline to electricity, then the remaining 25% (i.e. for longer trips) could come from E85 or bio-diesel. With cellulosic ethanol and bio-diesel, a goal of around 25% is realistically achievable.
2) Ethanol from Corn is only discussed in the U.S., and only because of the massive government subsidies for corn. Cellulosic ethanol and bio-diesel are the more viable forms of bio-fuel. Sugar cane is also used effectively in Brazil.
3) Cellulosic ethanol does not consume all the biomass. There is a sludge leftover. This sludge could be dried and burned for extra energy, or plowed under as fertilizer. Note that energy crops like switch grass don’t require much fertilizer.
4) Algae works best in closed loop vertical systems, like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ToojK_MJd0
With this method:
a) very little water evaporates
b) other strains of algae are blocked from entering the system
c) sunlight is used much more effectively
d) you can locate it anywhere (e.g. in the desert)
Note that algae is also an excellent way to scrub CO2 and other pollutants from existing power plants, like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBJ66Oim_Xw
June 30th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
#78 N Riley,
The Hyper Car concept seems to alternate between hybrid gasoline and hydrogen proplusion systems, but the point is that carbon fiber can be made economically.
I agree that hydrogen sucks - biggest scam going.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
The writers are jerks….that’s right, jerks. He’d have them continue to produce vehicles that are dependent on oil and keep us bankrupt to other countries for years to come. What a moron.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Jackson #72
I grew up on a small farm during the 50’s and early 60’s. This was before farmers were into heavy use of chemical fertilizers. We used crop rotation to keep our crop yields high. One year we would plant soybeans on a field, the next year we planted cotton. The next year we might plant corn in the same field. There was a sequence you could use with certain crops, especially legumes. Some crops added to the soil what the next crop needed. I know that if you don’t put back into the soil what you take out, the soil will wear out within about 25 - 35 years. If you think commuters are going to be in a pinch with the cost of gasoline, try being a farmer purchasing diesel to use on the farm.